Ban our guns?

Question

The United Nations and George Soros are at it again! On 4th July of all days the UN will convene a conference with the express aim to ban ALL guns worldwide ..... we can kiss goodbye to our freedom if this goes through ... whether you're pro or anti guns ... why should we allow other countries to dictate what should or shouldn't be in our own Constitution??

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms in defense of self, family, and country is self-evident. In essence, our Second Amendment shows profound respect for human freedom, worth, and self-destiny.

But two centuries after it was codified into our Bill of Rights, the U.N. is trying to declare that this civil liberty is a cause of the world's violence. It is trying to claim jurisdiction over sovereign American citizens by crafting a global treaty that calls on us to surrender our firearm freedom and accept whatever lesser standard of freedom--if any--the U.N. deems appropriate.

www.stopungunban.org.

Thanks for all the answers - if you need more info, go to the website - and if we get a "ban the guns" president next time around, this kind of conference and agreement is no doubt manna from heaven ... 'nuff said, I won't hand over my gun!

Hey jmeege .... I am no hippie, and this is not a conference to ban silencers etc.! This is a conference to ban hand guns worldwide!

Answer 1

In austrila they banned guns, they now have a higher crime rate and more violence than ever before. Seems all the criminals now have guns and none of the law biding citizens have anything to protect themselves with. Image that, ban guns and the only ones who have them are the very people you were attempting to ban them from. I just wonder what logic they use to come up with this stuff. Criminal are not known to follow the law, thus they are criminals. A better law would be to demand everyone own a gun.
Our constitution was very plain on this subject, it states very clearly that the right to bear arms shall not be abridged. Our founding fathers left their homelands to build a new home in America, they were fleeing persecutions by the church. They also understood that governments were less likely to attempt to harm you if they knew you had firearms. Pretty smart fellows if you ask me. The only question which remains is will We the People be able to keep this form of government. Or are we going to allow those who are suppose to serve steal another right from us or are we going to force them through accountablity to uphold their oaths of office? Any congressman or elected offical who puts corporate profits above the citizens is an impostor and has failed in upholding the consitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic. Every congressman who voted for the patriot act ought to be tried for treason, that law is in contradiction of the consitution, therefore the constitution declares it null and void, because the Constitution also states that any law that is in contradiction of it is null and void.

Answer 2

The Constitution's wording on the Right to Bear Arms is, unfortunately, very poorly worded. But if one takes the time to look in the Federalist Papers, s/he will find that our founding fathers saw the right to bear arms as a privilege that this country should retain at all times. The Federalist Papers and our founding fathers in other writings state that every citizen has the right to bear arms and the American Government should never have the right to take that privilege away. They believed the right to bear arms is the difference between free people and slaves. Every free person, they said, is part of the militia, not an elite few. Furthermore, that official membership in a "well-regulated militia is not necessary" to bear arms.
The very thought of banning guns is enough to start paranoia in many people who consider this a threat.
There's too much to write here, but I'll list my sources below for anyone to check out who is interested.

Answer 3

To the person talking about how they just want to ban "evil accessories" and not guns;

Not exactly true, in MD they tried to limit the numbers of "accessories" to one to be considered an "assault weapon". Since a pistol grip is one of the "evil accessories", this would have banned guns like the AR-15.

Second of all, if it was that innocent, then why did anti-gun groups have to lie about these guns, calling them "assault weapons", and saying that they were designed to "spray fire from the hip"- (actual quote from brady campaign website) just because they had a bayonet lug or some other cosmetic feature?

The UN ain't touching my guns, no matter what treaty gets signed
but I'll have no problem giving them the ammo.

Answer 4

simple a unarmed population is defenseless . Oblahma tried to ban guns in ILL but he didn't get it done .. Now he is king oblahma he wants to get it done nation wide .. All of you should read some of that so called health care bill and see what it really says ...It is not a health care bill at all but a new government bill .. after sunday we will be officially a socialist government .. And what did we do? we sit by and ran our mouths and did nothing .. We gave it up without a fight and now you will give your guns up the same way if they tell you to.. Yes there is some gun legislation in that so called health care bill before you think differently .. just go read the damn thing if you can find it anymore

Answer 5

Normally, I would probably ignore this question, but something urges me to write. I think we all need to be vigilant regarding our right to bear arms. Granted (to the anti-gunners), there is no "militia" to maintain these days. But firearms are tools, just like a shovel or rake, and always have been. They are for our use- to provide for our families, to protect ourselves, and (don't think it couldn't happen again, even in this day and age) to provide for the defense of our country. The antis will say that "guns are evil" and that "guns kill people." But the irrefutable evidence is there (look at gun control, England, and lots of other evidence): "Guns don't kill people; people kill people" and "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

Answer 6

I'll answer your question with a couple of questions:
Which one has been around longer? The U.S.Constitution.
Which one has done more good? The U.S.Constitution.
Which one belongs in the U.S.? The U.S.Constitution.
The U.N. is living in NY and not paying us any rent or taxes. I feel the U.N. has no business in our Constitution OR our Country.

Preach on sister!!! Chase that rabbit!!

Answer 7

Hey I have no problem with that--ON ONE CONDITION-The get all the criminals, terrorist, and other anti social groups to turn in their arms FIRST. I gave up hunting Bambi, Daffy, and Buggs a long time ago.

IN case you didn't notice --The only reason the UN is attended is because it's in New York. If they stuck it in the middle of Rhuanda, Iraq, or Gaza how many delegates could they get to come?

Answer 8

If one looks at the U.N.'s record, Its easy to see that if they ban guns, the actual number of guns worldwide will automatically double magically. I'm not sure how they do it, but everytime they try to fix an issue, they manifestly increase the problem...

Answer 9

Ban guns?.. So, just what do they think this will solve?? To honestly believe that banning firearms will solve anything is not an opinion I can honestly support. But hey who knows,maybe BinLaden is really in the U.S. and they'll catch him when he turns in his guns! The only people affected would be honest citizens.

Answer 10

no they cant ban guns beacuse of the second amendment the right to keep and bare arms and plus if u were in a life or deatyh situation in teh wild and all u had was a gun u wood have to hunt for food so no its wrong